Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-GbpsData Rate Transmission
2013.02.15AN-672 Subscribe Feedback
As transceiver data rates increase and the unit interval time (UI) decrease, the end-to-end link design of atransceiver channel becomes increasingly critical to the overall performance of the link. Consider an Altera®
Stratix® V FPGA with transceiver channels operating up to 28 Gbps. At this data rate, the UI is less than36 ps. Any signal degradation of the channel can impact jitter margin and increase eye closure, resulting inincreased bit error rates (BER). Two of the proposed standards for 100-Gpbs data transmission using fewerlanes are CEI-25G-LR and CEI-28G-VSR.
CEI-25G-LR is intended for 25 Gbps data transmission across long-reach backplane architectures. Likewise,CEI-28G-VSR specifies a 28-Gbps data rate for very short-reach chip-to-module and chip-to-chip applications.For these standards, the total insertion loss budget for the link at the Nyquist rate is approximately -25 dBfor CEI-25G-LR and -10 dB for CEI-28G-VSR. Successful data transmission across these types of linksrequires the designer to minimize signal degradation caused by the channel to meet stringent lossrequirements. Understanding the various factors that contribute to channel loss allows the designer to makeappropriate design choices to mitigate adverse effects and achieve optimal link performance. This applicationnote describes how to optimize a complete transceiver link for these very high-Gbps data transmissiondesigns.
Figure 1: Typical System End-to-End Transceiver Links
Stratix V Device
Stratix V Device
TX Breakout
RX Breakout
PCB Material
PCB Material
Blocking Cap
Backplane Connectors
Vias Vias
Vias Vias
Backplanetransceiver serial link
transceiver serial link
GND Ref Plane
GND Ref Plane
Vias
Vias
Vias
Signal thruconnector
Signal thruconnector
BackplaneReach
Egress
Ingress
Backplane Connectors
Stratix V Device TX & RX Breakout
PCB Material
Vias Vias
transceiver serial linkGND Ref Plane
Signal thruconnector
Egress
IngressBlocking Cap
GND Ref Plane
Plugable Module
Stratix V DeviceTX & RX Breakout
PCB Material
Vias
transceiver serial linkGND Ref Plane
Egress
IngressBlocking Cap
Vias
Stratix V Device
Vias
GND Ref Plane
TX & RX Breakout
(a) Line Cards Over Backplane Link
(b) Chip-to-module Link
(c) Chip-to-chip Link
A typical end-to-end transceiver link can be separated into three main components:
• PCB material• stack-up design• channel design
Designers must give careful consideration to each of these components to avoid degraded link performance.Link optimization involves understanding and managing the first-order factors that impact signal performancefor each of the three components. For high-speed signal transmission, these first-order factors are:
• Signal attenuation• Impedance control and discontinuities• Crosstalk
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission2 2013.02.15
PCB Material SelectionThe printed circuit board (PCB) material is the substrate upon which the channel design is constructed. Itconsists of the core, prepreg dielectric layers, and copper foils stacked and glued together to from the completePCB stack-up. The dielectric and copper layers form the reference planes and routing layers for the channeldesign. The sources of signal attenuation resulting from the PCB material include dielectric loss, conductorloss, reflections due to mismatched impedance, and radiation loss. Losses due to radiation are usually verysmall and can be ignored. The remaining losses can be attributed to the various properties of the materialchoice. Material properties that directly affect the link performance include:
Loss Tangent and Dissipation FactorLoss tangent (tan(δ)) (also referred to as dissipation factor (Df) by many PCB manufacturers) is a measureof signal attenuation as the signal propagates down the transmission line. This attenuation is the result ofelectromagnetic wave absorption in the dielectric material and is commonly known as dielectric loss. Asfrequency increases, the dielectric loss also increases proportionally. Common material choices for high-speedsignal layers include Nelco 4000-13EPSI, Rogers 4350B, and Panasonic Megtron 6. For very high-Gbpstransceiver designs, Altera has successfully used Panasonic’s Megtron 6 material as the laminates for thecore and prepreg layers surrounding the high-speed routing layers.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
3Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
Figure 2: Comparison of Material Loss Tangent
Given the choice, select the material with the lower loss tangent to reduce signal attenuation fromdielectric losses.
Note:
Dielectric ConstantThe dielectric Constant (Ɛr or Dk in many material datasheets) is a measure of the insulating properties ofthe material and affects the capacitance of the conductor embedded within it as well as the speed of signalpropagation on the transmission line. Lower dielectric constant provides better insulation, faster signalpropagation, higher trace impedance for a given trace geometry and smaller stray capacitance.
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission4 2013.02.15
Figure 3: Stripline Differential Trace
Table 1: 100-Ω Stripline FR4 vs. Megtron-6 Construction
Consider a 100-Ω differential stripline pair constructed with an optimal trace width (W) of 6 mils and pairseparation (S) of 15 mils. For FR4, the total dielectric thickness is 18.7 mils (T+H1+H2). For the same traceconstruction dimensions using Megtron-6 the total thickness is 13.7 mils. This reduction of total thicknessby 5 mils is significant because it quickly adds up for high density boards that require many signal layers.For instance, a typical FPGA board with 6 stripline routing layers can result in 30 mils of PCB thicknesssavings using the Megtron 6 vs. FR4. This can be the difference between boards that are easily manufacturedusing standard via drilling processes vs. ones that require more expensive laser drilling techniques becauseof the smaller board thickness to via aspect ratio. Furthermore, lower Ɛr results in faster signal propagation(Tpd) and lower trace capacitance (C), which improves signal performance.
An additional consideration for Ɛr is that it usually decreases as frequency increases. Decreasing Ɛr affectsthe transmission line in two ways:
• The trace impedance increases with decreasing Ɛr causing reflections that further degrade signal quality• The signal velocity increases with decreasing Ɛr causing dispersion of the different harmonics that comprise
the digital signal. This results in increased phase jitter at the receiver
Always choose lower Ɛr with a flat frequency response for best signal performance and to reducesignal dispersion that adds phase jitter.
Note:
Fiberglass WeavePCB boards are constructed of strands of fiberglass yarn woven into bundles with epoxy resin to form thefiberglass sheets that make up the core and prepreg laminates.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
5Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
Figure 4: Commonly Available Styles of Fiberglass Weaves
Since the dielectric constant of the fiber bundles and epoxy resin differ, the density of the fiber weaves affectsthe uniformity of the dielectric constant of the laminate. Sparsely woven cores and prepregs have less uniformdielectric constant and can result in impedance and signal velocity variations along the trace route. Forexample, consider a differential pair trace routed over 7268 style fiberglass vs. the same pair routed over 106style fiberglass. The 7268 glass will provide a more uniform dielectric constant since the copper traces willalways reside over the glass. However, traces routed over 106 style glass can result in having a differentialpair with one leg routed over glass while the other alternates between glass and resin. The main concern isthat each leg will have different impedances and skew in the differential signal. Although there are routingtechniques such as using zig-zag, jogged routing, and placing the complete board design at a slight cant onthe PCB panel to average out the on-weave/off-weave problem and mitigate the signal velocity variation,these techniques trade off valuable board real estate while not fully resolving the impedance variation andreflection problem. Additionally, these compensation techniques increases the trace lengths, causing additionalloss.
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission6 2013.02.15
Figure 5: Zig-zag, Jogged Routing, and Canted PCB Compensation Technique
As a result, for very high-Gbps data rates, select higher density fiberglass laminates for the high speed routinglayers while relegating sparsely dense fiberglass to lower speed and power layers to offset the PCB cost.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
7Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
Always choose more densely woven fiberglass style for the core and prepreg material surroundingthe high speed signal layers for more uniform Ɛr that will minimize impedance and signal velocityvariations.
Note:
Choose sparsely dense fiberglass styles for power layers and slower general purpose signal layers toreduce PCB cost.
Note:
Copper Surface RoughnessIn addition to dielectric loss, material losses also result from conductor loss. Conductor loss is the resistiveattenuation on the copper conductor. Resistive loss is usually mitigated by using appropriately wide traces.However, for very high frequency designs, the majority of the current distribution is pushed towards theouter surface of the copper conductor as a result of the skin effect. At frequencies where the skin depthapproaches the average roughness of the copper, the current flow is further impeded by the copper surfaceroughness, causing increased resistance and conductor loss.
Figure 6: Skin Effect and Copper Surface Roughness
The roughness of the copper surface varies depending on the construction of the copper foils. These foilsare either electrodeposited (commonly referred to as ED copper) or rolled and pressed to create a smoothercopper foil surface. The copper roughness is specified as an average value (Ra) in micrometers (µm). As acomparison, typical ED copper roughness has Ra of 1 µm or more while rolled copper ranges from 0.3 to0.4 µm. The effect of this copper roughness can be approximated by a correction factor (KSR) to the attenuationof the conductor (αCond).
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission8 2013.02.15
Where:αCond = Conductor attenuation without copper surface roughness correction.
α’Cond = Conductor attenuation with copper surface roughness correction.
KSR = Surface Roughness correction factor.
Ra = Average roughness in micrometers.
δ = skin depth, in meters.
σ = conductivity of copper conductor = 5.8 x 107 seimens/m.
μ0 = permeability of free space = 4π x 10-7 H/m.
μr = relative permeability of copper conductor = 1.
f = frequency, in Hz.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
9Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
Figure 8: Attenuation Effects of Copper Surface Roughness of 6-inch Microstrip Test Trace
The red curve is the high frequency structural simulator (HFSS) simulated attenuation of the conductor(αCond ) without the effects of surface roughness correction. The green curve is the same result with thesurface roughness correction factor (KSR) included. The blue curve is the actual vector network analyzer(VNA) measurement of the same test trace for correlation purposes.
To mitigate conductor loss, use wider traces and choose rolled copper foils over traditionalelectrodeposited (ED) copper foils in the PCB construction.
Note:
Certain simulation tools may not include loss effects from surface roughness. In these cases, thecorrection factor (KSR) must be added to get realistic prediction of the actual loss.
Note:
Related LinksPCB Dielectric Material Selection and Fiber Weave Effect on High-Speed Channel Routing Application NoteModeling Copper Surface Roughness for Multi-gigabit Channel Designs
Stackup DesignThe assignment of critical high-speed routing layers within the PCB stack-up is a critical part of the designdecision. The assignment of high-speed signal layers within the stackup directly affects the signal performance.Signals routed on external layers of the PCB board are referred to as microstrip, while those routed oninternal layers are called stripline.
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission10 2013.02.15
Figure 9: Differential Microstrip vs. Stripline Construction
By manipulating the various parameters such as trace width (W), separation (S), and height from the referenceplane (H for microstrip and H1, H2 for stripline), the trace impedance can be adjusted appropriately.Additionally, edge-coupled crosstalk from neighboring traces can be well-controlled by adjusting the pairseparation (D). For more information on crosstalk, refer to Crosstalk Control on page 17.
Table 2: Microstrip vs. Stripline
DisadvantagesAdvantagesTopology
• Only 2 routing layers possible• Higher EMI radiation• Both near-end crosstalk (NEXT) and far-end
crosstalk (FEXT) concerns
• Thinner dielectric for 100-Ω traces• No via for top routing• No via stubs for bottom routing
Microstrip
• Thicker dielectric required for 100 Ω• NEXT concerns• Via must be used• Via stubs require back-drilling
• Many routing layers possible• Inherent EMI shielding surrounding
layers• No FEXT concerns
Stripline
The decision to use one topology over the other examines the first-order factors that affect signal bandwidth.While impedance and crosstalk can be well-controlled in both routing topologies, stripline provides lowersignal attenuation vs. microstrip for the same trace width and copper thickness.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
11Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
Figure 10: Stripline vs. Microstrip Insertion Loss (Sdd21)
Figure 11: Stackup Construction
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission12 2013.02.15
For the same trace width and copper thickness considerations, stripline results in less signal attenuationcompared with microstrip.
Note:
Related LinksPCB Stack-up Design Considerations for Altera FPGAs Application Note
Channel DesignThe channel is the physical medium for sending data from a transmitting device to a receiving device. Thefive common components of a typical transceiver channel construction include:
• BGA channel breakout of the sending and receiving device• Trace route design• Signal via• DC blocking capacitors• Interface connectors.
Any channel usually involves two or more of these components. To optimize the channel for best signalperformance requires careful consideration of each of these components to minimize their first-order impacton the channel.
Figure 12: Channel Design Considerations
BGA Channel BreakoutAs the number of very high-speed transceiver pairs on FPGAs continue to increase, the complexity of thechannel breakout design increases as well. Trace breakout can typically use either a single trace or dual tracetopology between the BGA via grid.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
13Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
In the single trace breakout, more layers are required to fully route all the TX and RX transceiver pairsbecause only one trace is routed between the BGA via grid per layer. Because there is ample space for amaximum trace width of up to 13.37 mils (assuming typical minimum trace-to-copper clearances of 4 milsfor the recommended 18 mil via pad size and 39.37 mil via-to-via center pitch), the trace width and resultingcharacteristic impedance is easily made uniform throughout the trace route.
In the dual trace breakout, two traces are used to reduce layer count requirement, but their maximum tracewidth is limited to 4.68 mils because of the same trace-to-copper clearance requirements. Because high-speed
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission14 2013.02.15
transceiver traces are usually routed using trace widths of 6 to 8 mils (or more) to reduce the impact of skineffect losses at higher frequencies, the reduction of trace width to accommodate dual trace breakout effectivelyincreases the trace impedance. However, this increase is offset by the reduction of the trace-to-trace separationin the differential pair, so the net impedance remains unchanged.
Table 3: Net Impedance Effect of Trace Neck Down
Diff Zo (Ω)Trace Separation (S in mils)Trace Width(W in mils)
ErHeight from Reference Plane(H1/H2 in mils)
Topology
1006.563.79/9Stripline
101443.79/9Stripline
Another benefit of the trace neck down is that the thinner trace width increases the trace inductance andhelps to compensate for the higher capacitance of the BGA ball pad.
Related LinksPCB Breakout Routing for High-Density Serial Channel Designs Beyond 10 Gbps
Channel Routing DesignThe channel routing design involves the selection of critical trace parameters that can affect performance.
Trace Width Selection
PCBs are becoming very constrained, and using fine trace widths down to 4 mils wide is commonly used toimprove routability. However, for high-speed signals, narrow trace geometries increases conductor loss dueto skin effect. As a result, routabilty must be properly balanced with trace width selection for betterperformance. Larger signal attenuation occurs for signals at 4 mils vs. 5 to 6 mils. For example, for a 28-Gbpssignal, the difference in attenuation at the Nyquist frequency (14 MHz) is approximately 3 dB for 4 milsversus 6 mils wide trace.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
15Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
For high-speed transceiver signals, use trace widths of 6 mils or more to reduce conductor loss.Note:
Limit the use of 4 mil trace widths to the BGA breakout area and keep their trace length as short aspossible.
Note:
Loose vs. Tight Coupled Traces
The decision to use loose vs. tight coupling is mainly a trade-off between routing density and impedancecontrol.
Table 4: Loosely vs. Tightly Coupled Trace Routing
DisadvantageAdvantageRouting
Consumes more area vs. tight coupling• Thinner dielectrics required for the same tracewidth
• Less sensitivity to trace-to-trace variations providesbetter impedance control
LooselyCoupled
Impedance control highly sensitive totrace-to-trace variations
• Higher routing density• Smaller trace width for the same trace impedance• Better common mode noise rejection
TightlyCoupled
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission16 2013.02.15
For example, differential pair length matching typically requires serpentining of one leg of the differentialpair to maintain P to N skew. For loosely coupled traces, the serpentining does not drastically alter thedifferential impedance of the trace. However, for tightly coupled traces, the change in the trace-to-traceseparation can significantly change the nominal differential impedance of the pair beyond the ±10% tolerance.When applying serpentine routing, it is best to deskew after each bend or node that causes the trace lengthsto be mismatched. Doing so helps reduce common mode noise incurred along the signal path.
Figure 16: Differential Pair Length Matching
Table 5: Loosely vs. Tightly Coupled Routing Impedance Control
Loosely coupled traces are easier to route and maintain impedance control but take up more routingarea. Tightly coupled traces saves routing space but can be difficult to control impedance.
Note:
Crosstalk Control
Crosstalk is induced noise current resulting from mutual capacitive (Cm) and mutual inductive (Lm) couplingon a victim trace due to switching activity from nearby aggressor trace or traces. The current coupled fromCm travels along the victim trace in both the forward and reverse direction with the same polarity. Similarly,the current from Lm travels forward and backwards in opposite polarity. As a result, crosstalk can be separatedinto two distinct components referred to as near-end crosstalk (NEXT) and far-end crosstalk (FEXT). InNEXT, the coupled noise current is the sum of the induced currents from Cm and Lm as those currents arethe same polarity. Conversely, for FEXT, the current is the difference of Cm and Lm due to the polaritydifference. For signals entirely contained within a homogeneous dielectric material (such as stripline), thecapacitive and inductive forward crosstalk are equal and cancel. For non-homogeneous dielectrics (such asmicrostrip), the inductive component tends to be larger and the resulting coupled noise is negative.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
17Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
Figure 17: NEXT and FEXT Coupling Components
Cm
Aggressor Victim
Icm (forward)
Icm (reverse)
Aggressor Victim
-ILm (forward)
ILm (reverse)
Lm
Near-end Near-end
Far-end Far-end
Crosstalk control usually involves reducing signal edge rates and maintaining enough trace-to-trace separationto reduce the mutual capacitive and mutual inductive coupling energy. In high-speed transceiver designsrunning at many gigabits per second, reducing the signal edge rate is usually not an option since the unitinterval time (UI) is very small. Therefore, crosstalk control for high-speed transceiver designs is mainlydetermined by PCB layout spacing constraints to keep the transceiver traces far enough apart to minimizethe coupling effect. For very high-speed traces, it is desirable to keep the coupling noise to less than 1% ofthe source signal if possible.
Edge CouplingConsider two differential pairs routed on the same signal layer as shown in Figure 9 with a height (H) fromthe reference plane.
Table 6: Microstrip NEXT vs. Aggressor Separation
Microstrip routing requires a separation of 6H and 7H to properly manage the crosstalk coupling to less than1% for NEXT and FEXT, respectively. However, to achieve 1% of crosstalk coupling using stripline routing,requires only 5H separation for NEXT and 2H separation for FEXT.
Coupling (%)Coupled Voltage from a 1-V Aggressor (mV)Isolation (dB)Separation (D)
7.979221H
4.545272H
2.828313H
1.818354H
1.616365H
0.099416H
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission18 2013.02.15
Table 7: Microstrip FEXT vs. Aggressor Separation
Microstrip routing requires a separation of 6H and 7H to properly manage the crosstalk coupling to less than1% for NEXT and FEXT, respectively. However, to achieve 1% of crosstalk coupling using stripline routing,requires only 5H separation for NEXT and 2H separation for FEXT.
Coupling (%)Coupled Voltage from a 1-V Aggressor (mV)Isolation (dB)Separation (D)
2.020346H
0.099417H
Table 8: Stripline NEXT vs. Aggressor Separation
Coupling (%)Coupled Voltage from a 1-V Aggressor (mV)Isolation (dB)Separation (D)
6.363241H
2.525322H
1.516363H
1.111394H
1.010405H
Table 9: Stripline FEXT vs. Aggressor Separation
Coupling (%)Coupled Voltage from a 1-V Aggressor (mV)Isolation (dB)Separation (D)
2.525321H
1.010402H
Use stripline routing to avoid FEXT concerns. Use stripline traces with 5H differential pair-to-pairseparation to minimize NEXT to 1%.
Note:
If microstrip routing is required, used 6H-7H differential pair-to-pair separation to avoid NEXT andFEXT issues.
Note:
Broadside CouplingFor differential pair traces routed on adjacent signal layers, broadside coupling is much stronger if there isany overlapping of traces. This problem usually occurs under the congested BGA area where routing isconstrained.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
19Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
Figure 18: Broadside Coupled Traces
Simply increasing the vertical separation of broadside coupled traces is not practical because the requiredvertical separation (S) would need to be 10H for 1% coupling. This causes board thickness to quickly becomeunreasonable. Instead, broadside crosstalk minimization techniques should follow edge coupling rules bymaintaining a 5H horizontal separation (D) between pairs on adjacent layer. For the congested BGA area,the suggested routing implementation helps to avoid trace overlap.
Figure 19: Broadside Coupling Avoidance
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission20 2013.02.15
Figure 20: Suggested Routing Under BGA Area
Transparent Via DesignUnless you are routing all transceiver channels with only microstrip traces on the top layer, you must usevias in the design to transition layers. Unfortunately, the characteristic impedance of differential vias arelower than 100 Ω. Generally it is in the range of 80 to 85 Ω. This impedance mismatch causes reflectionsthat degrade the channel performance. To better match the impedance of the via with the 100 Ω differentialtraces requires optimization techniques that minimize the parasitic capacitance (Cvia) and inductance (Lvia)of the via.
You can minimize Cvia using the following optimization techniques:Tip:
• Reduce the via capture pad size• Eliminate all non-functional pads (NFP)• Increase the via anti-pad size to 40 or 50 mils
You can minimize Lvia using the following optimization techniques:Tip:
• Eliminate and / or reduce via stubs• Minimize via barrel length by routing the stripline traces near the top surface layer and applying
backdrilling
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
21Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
For example, consider an 8-layer PCB board that uses standard via with 10-mil drill diameter, 20-mil capturepad diameter, and 30-mil anti-pad diameter. Optimizing this via by successively applying the techniquesabove to minimize Cvia and Lvia improves the impedance of the via, and its insertion and return loss.
Figure 21: TDR of Standard vs. Optimized Via
Figure 22: Insertion and Return Loss of Standard vs. Optimized Via
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission22 2013.02.15
Additional improvements besides minimizing Cvia and Lvia involves providing a better AC return path byadding a ground via next to each signal via as well as applying backdrilling to remove any left over via stub.
Add ground return vias within 35 mils of each signal via to further improve the insertion and returnlosses of the via.
Note:
Related LinksVia Optimization Techniques for High-Speed Channel Designs
Blocking Cap OptimizationTransceiver channels often incorporate DC blocking capacitors to control the common mode voltage at thereceiver. However, the presence of the blocking capacitors in the channel creates an abrupt discontinuitywhere the trace meets the capacitor. Similar to via optimization, the layout footprint for the blocking capscan be optimized to minimize their impact on the channel. Because the larger capacitor pad results in loweringits characteristic impedance, one way of increasing this impedance to better match the trace impedance isto increase the distance to the reference by making cut-outs underneath the body of the capacitor footprint.
Figure 23: DC Blocking Capacitor Plane Cut-out
By cutting out the first reference plane directly below the capacitor, the impedance increases as it referencesthe second plane further away. However, if this second reference plane is close to the first reference plane,the increase may still not be enough. In this case it also becomes necessary to cut out the second, third, oreven more successive planes underneath to further increase the impedance.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
23Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
Figure 24: Additional Plane Cut-outs Underneath DC Blocking Cap
Normally, determining the proper plane cutout size and the number of layers below the capacitor to cut isdetermined by extensive 3-D simulations. However, a formulaic approach based on simulations fordetermining this cutout is also possible.
1. Cut out any plane underneath the capacitor whose proximity is within 0.75 Wc.2. Set the side gap of the cut-out for plane 1 (Wg) = 0.7 (Wc – Wt).3. Set the cut-out width of plane 1 (Wp1) = Wc+2 Wg.4. Set the cut-out length of plane 1 (Lp1) = Lc+2 mils.5. Set the cut-out width of successive plane N (WpN) = Wp1 + 10 (N-1).6. Set the cut-out length of successive plane N (LpN) = Lp1.
The following example compares the time-domain reflectometer (TDR) results of the DC blocking capacitorlayout with and without the plane cutout improvements. With the plane cutouts properly applied using theabove guidelines, the large discontinuity at the trace to DC blocking capacitor junction is eliminated.
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission24 2013.02.15
Figure 26: DC Blocking Capacitor Layout with and without Plane Cutouts
Figure 27: TDR Plot for DC Blocking Capacitor with and without Plane Cutouts
Related LinksOptimizing Impedance Discontinuity Caused by Surface Mount Pads for High-Speed Channel Designs
Connectors OptimizationAnother component commonly found in the path of transceiver channels are backplane connectors andoptical interface modules such as SFP+, XFP, and CFP2 among many others. For these components, themanufacturer may have specific design recommendations for the best connector performance, and thedesigner should follow those recommendations. If no recommendation is provided by the manufacturer,perform simulations to determine the best layout optimization. However, because most backplane andoptical connector systems use press-fit through-hole via or surface mount pad technology respectively, theconcept for optimization is very similar to that done for transparent via design and DC blocking capacitorcompensation. The impact of impedance mismatch limits performance. For these cases, you can use the
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
25Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
same methodology to optimize both the vias and surface mount pads in the connectors to better match theconnector impedance to the 100-Ω trace impedance.
Figure 28: Example Backplane Connector Layout
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission26 2013.02.15
Figure 29: Example XFP Optical Module Connector Layout
Notice that the via and surface mount pads show evidence of optimization such as increased via anti-padsize and plane cut-outs underneath the surface mount pads.
Use manufacturer layout recommendations for connectors if available. In the absence of any specificmanufacturer recommendations, designers can apply the transparent via optimization and DC
Note:
blocking capacitor compensation technique to connector systems that use through-hole via andsurface mount pad technologies, respectively.
SummaryA typical end-to-end transceiver link is comprised of three main components:
• PCB material• Stack-up design• Channel design
High-speed channel design involves understanding the first-order factors that impact performance in eachone of those components. These first-order factors are:
• Signal attenuation• Discontinuities and impedance control• Crosstalk
Some recommended design choices to oppose those effects are summarized below.
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
27Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
PCB Material Selection• Select the material with the lower loss tangent to reduce signal attenuation from dielectric losses.• Always choose lower Ɛr with a flat frequency response for best signal performance and to reduce signal
dispersion that adds phase jitter.• Always choose more densely woven fiberglass style for the core and prepreg material surrounding the
high speed signal layers for more uniform Ɛr that will minimize impedance and signal velocity variations.• Choose sparsely dense fiberglass styles for power layers and slower general purpose signal layers to reduce
PCB cost.• Use wider traces and choose rolled copper foils over traditional electrodeposited (ED) copper foils in the
PCB construction to mitigate conductor loss.• Certain simulation tools may not include loss effects from surface roughness. In these cases, the correction
factor (KSR) must be added to get realistic prediction of the actual loss.
Stackup DesignFor the same trace width and copper thickness considerations, stripline results in less signal attenuationcompared with microstrip.
Channel Design• For high-speed transceiver signals, use trace widths of 6mils or more to minimize conductor loss.• Limit use of 4-mil trace widths to the BGA breakout area and keep their trace length as short as possible.• Loosely coupled traces are easier to route and maintain impedance control but take up more routing
area.• Tightly coupled traces saves routing space but can be difficult to control impedance.• Use stripline routing to avoid FEXT concerns.• Use stripline traces with 5H differential pair-to-pair separation to minimize NEXT to 1%.• If microstrip routing is required, used 6H-7H differential pair-to-pair separation to avoid NEXT and
FEXT issues.• Cvia optimization techniques
• Reduce the via capture pad size• Eliminate all non-functional pads (NFP)• Increase the via anti-pad size to 40 or 50 mils
• Lvia optimization techniques:
• Eliminate and / or reduce via stubs• Minimize via barrel length by routing near the stripline traces near the top surface layer and applying
backdrilling
• Add ground return vias within 35 mils of each signal via to further improve the insertion and returnlosses of the via.
• Use manufacturer layout recommendations for connectors if available. In absence of any specificmanufacturer recommendations, designers can apply the transparent via optimization and DC blockingcapacitor compensation.
Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAltera Corporation
AN-672Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission28 2013.02.15
References• Base Materials for High Speed, High Frequency PC Boards, Rick Hartley, PCB&A, Mar 2002• High-Speed Digital Design, Handbook of Black Magic, Howard Johnson & Martin Graham, Professional
Technical Reference, Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458, 1993• Signal Integrity – Simplified, Dr. Eric Bogatin, Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, Upper
Saddle River, NJ 07458, Dec 2006• A Survey and Tutorial of Dielectric Materials Used In the Manufacture of Printed Circuit Boards, Lee
W. Ritchey, Speeding Edge, Circuitree Magazine, Nov 1999• High-Speed Digital Systems Design, A Handbook of Interconnect Theory and Design Practices. Stephen
W. Hall, Garrett W. Hall, James A. McCall, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2000• Discussions on Non Functional Pad Removal / Backdrilling and PCB Reliability, Bill Birch, PWB
Interconnect Solutions Inc., 103-235 Stafford Road West, Nepean, Ontario, Canada• A Practical Method for Modeling PCB Transmission Lines with Conductor Surface Roughness and
Wideband Dielectric Properties, Tao Liang, Stephen Hall, Howard Heck & Gary Brist• Non-Classical Conductor Losses Due to copper Foil Roughness and Treatment, Gary Brist, Stephen Hall,
Sidney Clouser, & Tao Liang• CEI-25G-LR and CEI-28G-VSR Multi-Vendor Interoperability Testing White Paper, Optical
Internetworking Forum, March 2012
Document Revision History
Table 10: Document Revision History
ChangesVersionDate
Initial release2013.02.15February 2013
Altera CorporationTransceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate Transmission
29Transceiver Link Design Guidelines for High-Gbps Data Rate TransmissionAN-6722013.02.15
